2004 Cobra Battle Hornet... a suprising Review - Page 4


Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31
    But destrocastle,

    I'm right!

  2. Remove Advertisements


  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Orange
    The Battle Hornet is garbage. Plain and simple.
    An airplane with no wings or engines? Come on.
    It was a wasteful diversion of time and resources that Hasbro could have used to make better vehicles.
    That's all that needs to be said about the subject.

    Gee whiz, that's not rude at all. Nor does it seem like any sort of attempt to squash any further discussion of the item in question. And you call me rude? After you look up 'tact' in the dictionary, look up 'hypocrite'

  4. #33

    Dude, give it up. You made an accusation you can't prove and your comments were hypocritical from the start (telling me that I was trying to crush someone's opinion - which I obviously wasn't - while telling me that my opinion was unwanted). I even forgave you.

    Everyone else wants to get back on topic, why can't you?
    Last edited by Agent Orange; 09-22-2004 at 11:51 AM.

  5. Remove Advertisements


  6. #34
    it kind of looks like you guys jumped on him for disagreeing with your review.

  7. #35
    i don't like it, but hey it's a free country. i would never spend my money on it. the whole thing looks like something from a fair. as the cheese head neo viper carnie would say "step right up folks, for only a quarter, yes that's right a quarter you can pretend you are a real pilot, fun for the childeren, how about you sir?"

  8. #36
    Member nightc1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Alabama the Beautiful


    I watched the part of the movie with the Battle Hornet in it... and figured out what they used for propulsion.

    The two under the wing bombs are the propusion units in the movie.

    Also some other differences in the Toy versus the movie. The single front cannon is actually two guns in the movie. Also the landing gear doesn't fold up on the em while flying. Infact .. it doesn't look like landing gear at all but rather are fixed in the down position.

    I think, this vehicle could very well make a sub/airplane counterpart to the SharK.

    There is one way I see that this vehicle could be made to have the dual guns from the movie version. Without a missile in the front gun it will turn around 180 degrees thus facing backwards. On the sides of the main gun are two round areas which I could imagine a gun on each side being mounted to. So ultimately it would have the main missile gun thing pointed backwards and two smaller more movie-ish guns facing forward.

    Again, I'm one of the few enjoying this vehicle. But still... figurd I'd share that since someone else may want to know the differences between the Movie and Toy and maybe know how to improve the toy so it's more movie like
    :D Yo Joe! :D

  9. #37
    it reminds me of the update to a trouble bubble that someone at joe cutoms made using a watch case.........anyways..........the vehicle looks like it belongs in tiger force and ill wait and buy the repaint myself
    Always wanted: Foreign figs, protos and test shots, and vs 1 BATs and parts.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts